DKNicholson

I'm using an Altair Wave Series 115 refractor with a Starlight Xpress Trius-694 camera. The guide camera is a Lodestar x2 through a TS-50 and Barlow x1.5. The image from the guide camera is very good and the ratio of guiding to imaging is 1:1.6 which I understand to be quite good for this set-up. I do have an SW ST80 where the ratio is 1: 2.2 which is OK, but the clarity of the stars is not particularly good. Using the TS-50 on its own pushes the ratio a bit far and the image through the Barlow and TS-50 is better than that using the ST80, so I've settled on that for the time being. The photosites (pixels) are the active cells on the chip and PHD2 seems to presume they are square as there is only one box available to enter the size. The Lodestar x2 has rectangular photosites (pixels) that are 8.4um x 9.8um. For some odd reason I had this set to 8.0um, but have now set it to 9.1um as the mean. I'm currently waiting for some clear sky to recalibrate PHD2 and run the guiding assistant. If I can get the RMS total error below 0.8 then I should be a happy bunny. David

Louise hi - That is pretty much as it is balanced at the moment and everything is absolutely rigid. I have found a couple of settings in PHD2 that may help a little. Whilst the image of the main camera and the image of the guide camera are similar, it is plainly evident that it is better if they are carefully centred on the same object. Also the photosite size of the guide camera was not accurate whilst the focal length of the 'scope and Barlow X1.5 is! I should also calibrate again and see if that helps - otherwise it's a bit of a mystery! David

Louise - Thank you kindly for that. I have an EQ6-R Pro which comes belt driven, so it would seem that should have removed most of the issues. My concern is with guiding and I find the graph does jump around more than I expected. Whilst I know there can be various reasons for this, I have never applied any bias to balancing - except perhaps slightly camera heavy (refractor) and I had wondered therefore if balancing might be part of the problem. David

Louise Hi - With the telescope etc in the home position pointing very near to Polaris, I should be most grateful if you could explain to me what is meant by East Heavy. Don't worry - I have just found an explanation elsewhere in the forum! 🤩

Having read through most of the posts there were two things that I noticed that seem like very good ideas. There are two very distinct parts to Astrophotography - the image capture and then the post processing. It is fair to say that both are an amazing challenge. Someone mentioned the book 'Make Every Photon Count' and that is certainly an excellent book for both aspects and is highly recommended. Another item mentioned was the SkyWatcher Star Adventurer. If you can pick up one of these 2nd-hand it suits a DSLR and lens very well indeed and the tracking is excellent. As it is very portable you can keep it and use it even when you have upgraded your telescope and mount. I am lucky enough to have a lot of different equipment, but I still have a Star Adventurer and it's an impressive device. The attached image was taken using a DSLR and lens mounted on to it, then post processed to accentuate the asterism - Kemble's Cascade. BEWARE, this is an addictive hobby and for once the adage is perfectly true - when it comes to expense 'the sky really is the limit'! It has just occurred to me that Stellarium is free planetarium software for a computer that would certainly help you find your way around the night sky and find objects to view and image. As has been suggested, I should be inclined to use your current telescope and mount for observing.

Just found another astro-video that I had failed to process from April 2016!! This one is of quite a decent Sunspot - how did I forget about it?! Telescope: Meade LX90-8" Camera: ZWO ASI120MC Barlow: Meade x2 Filter: Baader Solar Film Software: Sharpcap, AS!3, Photoshop CS3 Video: 20% of 2,000 frames

Yes - I'm inclined to agree - I think I became a bit colour confused! 😖 Is the attached a bit better?

Thanks for that - it works for me, even now! 😁

I always manually input the coordinates from Stellarium so that I can position the DSO in the frame just where I want it. In Stellarium I have set-up the various hardware options I might use when imaging and that gives the appropriate image size and frame for me to select the relevant hardware configuration to use for any particular DSO. Then I usually select a star in the centre of the frame so the position of the DSO is accurate and Stellarium provides the precise coordinates of that star. I have now created a list of objects to image and it takes just moments to enter their coordinates. Having said that, I recently imaged the Cave Nebula and put the coordinates in very slightly incorrectly so it was a bit out!

This is what happens when going through 'old' astronomy files. I found a video file of Jupiter that I hadn't processed from way back in March 2016. It turns out to be the best image of Jupiter that I have managed and I'd forgotten I'd even taken the video!! Telescope: Meade LX90-8" Camera : ZWO ASI120MC Barlow: Antares 2" x1.6 Capture: Sharpcap Frames: 20% of 2,000 Processing: AS!3 - Registax6 - Photoshop CS3 The frame was cropped but the image is full size.

I use Sequence Generator Pro for image capture, guiding, platesolving etc, etc. With Platesolve 2 (free) installed for SGPro the telescope is accurately pointed at the DSO you're after and it does automatic meridian flips if necessary. The co-ordinates for the DSO I get from Stellarium (free) which is worth downloading in any event. SGPro does take a little setting up but it is worth it. Obviously accurate polar alignment is necessary as is a fairly consistent home position.